This is BS. Women and men are kept seperate in most housing situations during combat to prevent sexual misconduct. So why in the hell would we now distract military officals with needing to figure out what to do to prevent misconduct between same sexes? This is retarded. I mean it is simply not a distraction our military needs.

How are they going to handle the barracks situation where most soldiers have roommates? What if a straight soldier is assigned a gay roommate and that gay guy wants to bring his boyfriend over for the night? When that heterosexual soldier complains, he's just going to get charged with sexual harassment. That's going to destroy his morale and motivation, and he's going to look for the quickest way out of the Army. Where otherwise he might have stayed in his entire career.

How are they going to handle the barracks situation where most soldiers have roommates? What if a straight soldier is assigned a gay roommate and that gay guy wants to bring his boyfriend over for the night? When that heterosexual soldier complains, he's just going to get charged with sexual harassment. That's going to destroy his morale and motivation, and he's going to look for the quickest way out of the Army. Where otherwise he might have stayed in his entire career.

I've seen it happen many times to white soldiers from policies designed to protect African-Americans from discrimination. And to male soldiers from policies designed to protect women from sexual harassment. Those policies are designed to level the playing field, but in fact give the minority the upper hand that a few of them are more than willing to use to "pay back" whoever they feel is oppressing them, whether that oppression is real or imagined.

I've seen it happen many times to white soldiers from policies designed to protect African-Americans from discrimination. And to male soldiers from policies designed to protect women from sexual harassment. Those policies are designed to level the playing field, but in fact give the minority the upper hand that a few of them are more than willing to use to "pay back" whoever they feel is oppressing them, whether that oppression is real or imagined.

I had an incident a few months ago similar nature.. A lady thought I was racist, because she felt I slammed the door based on her color!!

I had an incident a few months ago similar nature.. A lady thought I was racist, because she felt I slammed the door based on her color!!

We had a soldier in Korea who got put on charges of racial discrimination because he asked a simple, logical question, "If I'm not allowed to say the word 'nigger' because I'm white, then why should I be forced to listen to that same word repeated over and over and over again in the gangster rap that my roommate plays ALL THE TIME?"

Unfortunately, not only was his roommate black, but so was his squad leader, so he was charged with making a racial slur. He was never the same soldier after that and became completely disillusioned with the Army and started making plans to leave the Army immediately after his enlistment was up.

Yeah, there is no illusion of personal privacy in the Army. Many Constitutional freedoms are signed away when a person joins the military. As many commanders have said (and I'm sure it's been repeated in more than one movie), "We're here to defend the Constitution, not to practice it."

Good catch on them not mentioning the DADT was a Clinton policy, Nate. As far as this issue goes, I have always just been behind whatever policy the different branches of the military preferred to have in place. Far be it for me to say what is best for the armed services.

If I'm not mistaken, all 4 branches wanted this legislation put off until the Afghanistan conflict was resolved.

Obama chose to add to his political scorecard in lieu of following the advice of his military commanders.

I personally think he wanted this passed now because he was tired of being heckled at all his public appearances. Seriously.